Argumentation in science

dowser versus hydrogeologist

Authors

  • Francisco González García Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación. Universidad de Granada
  • Raquel Gómez Loarces Instituto de Formación Profesional Enrique Tierno
  • Gracia Fernández Ferrer Profesora Asociada de la Universidad de Granada. Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación
  • Sila Pla Pueyo Vicedecana de Internacionalización Faculta de Educación de la Universidad de Granada.

Keywords:

Argumentation, Dowsing, Groundwater, Pseudoscience, Science education

Abstract

A study of the capacity of scientific argumentation in students of Advanced Professional Training in Environmental Health is presented. Several groups of students carried out a three stages exercise, including a debate at the end of each stage. At the end, they had to decide between hiring a hydrogeologist or a dowser to find groundwater (scientific vs. pseudoscientific solution). Analysis of the resulting arguments indicates that there is a lack of connection between previous ideas from the students and the arguments used by them. We conclude that in order to improve the student's argumentation skills and scientific literacy, critical thinking must be encouraged.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Francisco González García, Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación. Universidad de Granada

Licenciado y Doctor en Ciencias Biológicas. Profesor Titular de la Universidad de Granada. Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación. Orcid:  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8127-9792

Raquel Gómez Loarces, Instituto de Formación Profesional Enrique Tierno

Licenciada en Ciencias Biológicas. Profesora de Formación Profesional. Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2188-4402

Gracia Fernández Ferrer, Profesora Asociada de la Universidad de Granada. Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación

Licenciada en Geología y Doctora en Didáctica de las Ciencias. Profesora Asociada de la Universidad de Granada. Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación. Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3530-8553

Sila Pla Pueyo, Vicedecana de Internacionalización Faculta de Educación de la Universidad de Granada.

Licenciada y Doctora en Ciencias Geológicas. Vicedecana de Internacionalización Faculta de Educación de la Universidad de Granada. Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4884-4096

References

ABD-EL-KHALICK, F.; LEDERMAN, N.G. Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, v. 22, n. 7, p. 665-701, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044

ARMENTIA, J. Ciencia vs pseudociencias. Mediatika. Cuadernos de medios de comunicación, v. 8, p. 559-571, 2002. http://ojs.eusko-ikaskuntza.eus/index.php/mediatika/article/view/127/0

ARTHURS, L. Using student conceptions about groundwater as resources for teaching about aquifers. Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 67, n. 2, p. 161–173, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2018.1561111

CADEMÁRTORI, Y.; PARRA, D. Reforma Educativa y Teoría de la Argumentación. Revista Signos, v. 33, n. 48, p. 69-85, 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342000004800006

Canal REDMÁS (21 de marzo de 2014) Zahorí, experto en búsqueda de aguas subterráneas [Archivo de Vídeo]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AGK5gBCeII

Canal REDMÁS (2 de noviembre de 2013) Buscar agua. [Archivo de Vídeo]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bdRthx7WX4

CAÑAS, J. A. En busca del acuífero dulce en la ciudad salada. El País. 12 de mayo, 2018. https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/05/02/ciencia/1525272754_207987.html

CHOW, J. Pendular Diagnosis: From Dowsing to Diagnostic Methodology? Seminars in Integrative Medicine, v. 3, n. 2, p. 38-43, 2005.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239302023_Pendular_Diagnosis_From_Dowsing_to_Diagnostic_Methodology

COSGROVE-MATHER B. Most believe in psychic phenomena. CBS News. 29 April 2002. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-most-believe-in-psychic-phenomena/

DAWSON, V.M.,; VENVILLE, G. Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socio-scientific issues in high school genetics. International Journal of Science Education, v. 40, p. 133–148, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y

ENRIGHT, J.T. Testing Dowsing: The Failure of the Munich Experiments. Skeptical Inquirer, v. 32, n. 1, p. 39-46, 1999.

https://skepticalinquirer.org/1999/01/testing-dowsing-the-failure-of-the-munich-experiments/

ERDURAN, S., GUILFOYLE, L., PARK, W. Science and religious education teachers’ views of argumentation and its teaching. Research in Science Education, v. 22, p. 655-673, 2022.

FERNÁNDEZ-FERRER, G.; GONZÁLEZ-GARCÍA, F. Modelos de localización y funcionamiento del agua subterránea en universitarios de ciencias. Revista Electrónica de Enseñanza de las Ciencias, v. 9, n. 3, p. 716-736, 2010. http://reec.uvigo.es/volumenes/volumen9/ART12_Vol9_N3.pdf

FUENTES, C.; ALCAIDE, E. R. Argumentación lingüística y sus medios de expresión. Arco Libros, 2007.

GÁMEZ, L.A. Los periodistas y las falsas ciencias. Mediatika. Cuadernos de Medios de Comunicación, v. 8, p. 27-37, 2002.

https://ojs.eusko-ikaskuntza.eus/index.php/mediatika/article/view/97

HASSAN, A.B. Arab contributions to hydronymy: the detecting of underground water that led to the construction of water wells. Islamic heritage architecture and art, v. 197, p. 13-25, 2020. https://www.witpress.com/elibrary/wit-transactions-on-the-built-environment/197/37610

KLIX, F. Problem Solving: Deduction, Induction, and Analogical Reasoning. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. En N Smelser & P.B. Baltes (Eds.): International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier Science, p. 12123-12130, 2004.

LAUGKSCH, R.C. Scientific Literacy: A Conceptual Overview. Science Education, v. 84, n. 1, p. 71-94, 2000.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200772545_Scientific_Literacy_A_Conceptual_Overview

LEE, T. D.; GAIL JONES, M.; CHESNUTT, K. Teaching systems thinking in the context of the water cycle. Research in Science Education, v. 49, p. 137-172, 2019.

MACAGNO, F.; WALTON, D.; REED, C. Argumentation Schemes. History, Classifications, and Computational Applications. IFCoLog Journal of Logics and Their Applications, v. 4, n. 8, p. 2493-2556, 2017.

MARANGIO, K.; GUNSTONE, R. Science as “Just Opinion”–The Significance for Science Education of Emerging Social Media. In Values in Science Education (pp.69-89). Springer Verlag, 2020.

MCCARNEY, R.; FISHER, P.; SPINK, F.; FLINT, G.; HASELEN, R. Can homeopaths detect homeopathic medicines by dowsing? A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, v. 95, n. 4, p. 189-191, 2002.

MENADUE, C.B. Pandemics, epidemics, viruses, plagues, and disease: comparative frequency analysis of a cultural pathology reflected in science fiction magazines from 1926 to 2015. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, v. 2, n.1, 100048, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100048

MILLER, J.D. Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: what we know and what we need to know. Public Understandment of Science, v. 13, p.273–294, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662504044908

PELÁEZ, E. La quimera del agua. El País. 1 de agosto 1995. https://elpais.com/diario/1995/08/01/sociedad/807228009_850215.html

PREECE, P.F.; BAXTER, J.H. Scepticism and gullibility: The superstitious and pseudoscientific beliefs of secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, v. 22, n. 11, p. 1147-1156, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050166724

QUEVEDO, G.; GONZÁLEZ, F.; FERNÁNDEZ-FERRER, G. Un estudio sobre pensamiento pseudocientífico en estudiantes de educación secundaria. Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales y Sociales, v. 37, p. 147-164, 2019. https://doi.org/10.7203/dces.37.15339

RYAN, T.J.; BROWN, J.; JOHNSON, A.; SANBERG, C.; SCHILDMIER, M. Science literacy and belief in the paranormal-an empirical test. Skeptic, v. 10, n. 4, p.12-13, 2004.

SHERMER, M. Why smart people believe weird things. Skeptic, v. 10, n. 2, p. 62-73, 2003.

SOLBES, J. Questóes sociocientíficas e pensamento crítico: uma proposta para questionar as pseudociências. Tecné, Episteme y Didaxis, v. 46, p. 81-99, 2019.

SOLBES, J. Pensamiento crítico y cuestiones socio-científicas: Formación del profesorado y su transferencia a la práctica. Boletín ENCIC: Revista del Grupo de Investigación HUM-974, v. 5, n. 2, p. 80-90, 2021.

SOLBES, J.; TORRES, N.Y. Educación científica basada en pruebas. Praxis & Saber, v.11, n. 27, p.1-5, 2020. https://doi.org/10.19053/22160159.v11.n27.2020.12287

SOLOMON, J. The rise and fall of constructivism. Studies in Science Education, v. 23, p. 1-19, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269408560027

TOULMIN, S. The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press, 2003.

VENVILLE, G. Science Inquiry: Thinking and Working Like a Scientist. In The Art of Teaching Science (pp. 122-139). Routledge, 2020.

VOGT, E.Z.; HYMAN, R. Water Witching U.S.A. (2nd Edition). University of Chicago Press, 2000.

WALKER, W.R.; HOEKSTRA, S.J, VOGL, R.J. Science education is no guarantee of skepticism. Skeptic, v. 9, n. 3, p. 24-28, 2002.

WALTON, D.N. Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996.

WHITE, H.; FORBES, C.T. An investigation of undergraduate students’ spatial thinking about groundwater. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, v. 47, n.1, p. 128-148, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2021.2004582

WHITE, H.; LALLY, D.; FORBES, C. T. Investigating groundwater: Middle school students’ mapping data-driven, computer-based models to socio-hydrologic phenomena. Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 70, n. 1, p. 101-113, 2022.

WHITTAKER, W.E. Grave Dowsing Reconsidered. University of Iowa., 2013. https://archaeology.uiowa.edu/sites/archaeology.uiowa.edu/files/Dowsing.pdf

Downloads

Published

2023-12-14

How to Cite

GONZÁLEZ GARCÍA, F.; GÓMEZ LOARCES, R.; FERNÁNDEZ FERRER, G.; PLA PUEYO, S. Argumentation in science: dowser versus hydrogeologist. Revista Internacional de Pesquisa em Didática das Ciências e Matemática, [S. l.], p. e023017, 2023. Disponível em: https://periodicoscientificos.itp.ifsp.edu.br/index.php/revin/article/view/1460. Acesso em: 15 may. 2024.